Jemella Australia Pty Ltd v Young [2008] FCA 394

Jemella Australia Pty Ltd v Young [2008] FCA 394

On the affidavit evidence, the Court was satisfied that there was a strong prima facie case concerning counterfeit GHD products and a real and serious risk that relevant evidence would not be preserved or available in the ordinary course unless a search order was made. The proposed order, confined to 4 Parry Street, Moonee Ponds, was consistent with Order 25B and the practice direction, and interim restraint of the first, second and third respondents was appropriate until 4:00pm on 1 April 2008.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for a Search Order and Interlocutory Relief / Ex Parte Application Heard on 18 March 2008
Outcome
Search order and interim injunctive relief granted ex parte; costs reserved; application adjourned to 1 April 2008.
Legal Topics
['search Order' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'counterfeit Goods' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'intellectual Property' 'consumer Protection'] ['search Order' 'interlocutory Injunction' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'counterfeit Goods' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for a Search Order and Interlocutory Relief / Ex Parte Application Heard on 18 March 2008

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a search order should issue under Order 25B of the Federal Court Rules and the applicable practice direction.' "Whether interim injunctive relief should restrain the first, second and third respondents from dealing with counterfeit hairstyling products bearing the marks 'GHD Hairstyling Iron' or 'GHD'." 'Whether confidentiality should be preserved over affidavit material identifying features by which counterfeit articles are determined.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the affidavit evidence, the Court was satisfied that there was a strong prima facie case concerning counterfeit GHD products and a real and serious risk that relevant evidence would not be preserved or available in the ordinary course unless a search order was made. The proposed order, confined to 4 Parry Street, Moonee Ponds, was consistent with Order 25B and the practice direction, and interim restraint of the first, second and third respondents was appropriate until 4:00pm on 1 April 2008.

Court Disposition

Search order and interim injunctive relief granted ex parte; costs reserved; application adjourned to 1 April 2008.

Orders

  • ['A search order issue in the form of the Search Order marked Annexure 1 to the Order.' "The first, second and third respondents were restrained until 4:00pm on 1 April 2008 from distributing, advertising and offering for sale, displaying or otherwise exploiting counterfeit hairstyling products bearing the mark 'GHD...